ArticleHNO2017
[Follow-up ultrasound of head and neck cancer].
Article in HNO, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Structured Reporting of Head and Neck Sonography Achieves Substantial Interrater Reliability.Ultrasound international open · 2023Article
- Article
- The use of structured reporting of head and neck ultrasound ensures time-efficiency and report quality during residency.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2020Article
- Impact of structured reporting on developing head and neck ultrasound skills.BMC medical education · 2019Article
- Structured reporting of head and neck ultrasound examinations.BMC medical imaging · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In Germany high-resolution sonography using the color duplex mode in addition to computed tomography (CT) is a well-established and proven method in the context of restaging after primary therapy of head and neck squamous cell cancer (HNSCC). There are no international evidence-based restaging guidelines. Decisions concerning neck dissection (ND) after primary radiochemotherapy (RCT) are often individually derived in the respective tumor conferences and are therefore subject to variance. Compared to the UK or USA, in Germany there is a high level of expertise in the use of ultrasound in combination with CT for the routine restaging of HNSCC after RCT. Using high-resolution sonography (B-mode and color duplex) morphological changes in neck lymph nodes can be clearly detected. Another important aspect in the field of sonographic follow-up is the accurate and standardized documentation of findings and control of dynamic changes during follow-up. In summary, clinical presentation and sonography enable therapeutic decisions and treatment from one source.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.